Join for free
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3
Lion Queen
Chatterbox
Lion Queen is offline
UK
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 9,592
Lion Queen is female  Lion Queen has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
06-09-2019, 01:41 PM
21

Re: Censoring Social Media

Originally Posted by Mups ->
I wonder where to draw the line with 'Free Speech' though?

What about the religious nuts, or the hate preachers, should they be allowed their free speech ideas to try and force people to think their way?

Like I said earlier, some weaker people will always succumb.
when its about teaching to kill they need shutting down.

I don't think anti vaxxers are preaching to kill, I think the opposite, they are trying to stop people putting something into their body that may kill their immune system.

It could be said that big pharma are preaching to us, preaching that we SHOULD take the vaccine

I'm no expert so I don't know who is right and who is wrong but I don't think it right to shut down someone who is giving good knowledge and evidence as to why we shouldn't just as we shouldn't shut down the ones who say we should.

We need to carry on being able to make our own minds up what we feel is good for ourselves or not.

I don't know, it's so complex isn't it.
Realist
Chatterbox
Realist is offline
UK
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 9,184
Realist is male  Realist has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
06-09-2019, 01:58 PM
22

Re: Censoring Social Media

Originally Posted by Mups ->
What about the religious nuts, or the hate preachers, should they be allowed their free speech ideas to try and force people to think their way?
Free speech is free speech.

If you are of a desire to forcibly staple people's mouths shut because you don't like their views then you stand alongside all the dictators and tyrants of the world.

Free speech is free speech. It means I can shout as loud as I like about the current government and what I think of them.

The EU laws talk about "Freedom Of Expression", rather than Freedom of Speech per say.

And with that comes a whole bunch of caveats and responsibilities and most of those are fine.

For example one can not within free speech simply go saying for example that Person XYZ is a paedophile. Well let me correct that. You CAN go say anything you want, but there are consequences to doing so. In the above case it would be slander and defamation of character and would result in a libel court case.

In the context of your OP any attempts to simply shut down open discourse about vaccines is both wicked and oppressive. There needs to be due assessment of the plethora of available information by all concerned in order to make an informed decision. Closing down debate of such information would amount to totalitarian censorship and be a very significant concern for most free people. Such censorship should be opposed with vigour imho.

The medical industry as a whole is not without its problems or failures or corruption and censorship only breeds more corruption. ALL areas of society should be under free public scrutiny. Consequently people are concerned about a great many aspects of the current health industry.

For example there is growing concern about the level of people that the health industry is currently addicting to opiods in the USA. There are many suggestions of over prescribing such drugs which amounts to little more than peddling crack coccaine. A very lucrative business I'm sure for the drug cartels.

Our health is a precious thing, it's about the only real important thing we have as without it we are practically nothing. When health becomes a marketable profit making commodity we are headed for dark times indeed. You ultimately reach a point where simply living, being born, just existing comes with a huge price tag. i.e you will die if you don't pay for drugs A, B, C and D and have vaccines E, F, G and H and so on.

The freedoms of the human race as a species is decreasing at an alarming rate due to a small minority of vastly wealthy and powerful cartels and elitists. If it is permitted to continue then life itself will become a marketable commodity.

Finally I will absolutely agree with DooD's post above.

Any attempt by the vaccine industry to influence law making to outlaw and censor discussion of vaccines on the internet will absolutely drive honest sincere concerns and conspiracy theorists alike into overdrive. It's not the way to go.

It also has impacts to research and testing.

What happens if a genuine independent research body tests a vaccine and proves its efficacy is extremely low?

Should they be censored so that the public are not aware of such information?
Meg's Avatar
Meg
Supervisor
Meg is offline
Worcestershire
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 42,850
Meg is female  Meg has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
06-09-2019, 02:22 PM
23

Re: Censoring Social Media

Originally Posted by AnnieS ->
Well it is the world wide web so potentially anyone. But the sort of surveillance we are talking about is done by bots rather than humans. Anyone who doesn't want to be read can get around it by avoiding certain key words. (if you know what the key words are).
I think the point is being missed here somewhat where social media is concerned and it isn't as simple as not reading something when information which may be fake is delivered to people along with friends photographs and birthday reminders . We are not talking about conventional 'free speech' but the selection, targeting and manipulation of members of a social media site with the use of algorithms as explained perfectly here in this short radio programme...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000846b

It began with Mark Zuckerberg adding a news feed to his 'innocent' social media invention 'Manipulation book' and then using the same medium (news feed) to allow algorithms to target users so they are in effect being selected to receive certain information even if it is fictitious.
This allows misinformation to be spread rapidly around the globe.

An example here...
A Genocide Incited on Facebook, With Posts From Myanmar’s Military
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/t...-genocide.html


It's a scary world we live in now ...
Realist
Chatterbox
Realist is offline
UK
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 9,184
Realist is male  Realist has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
06-09-2019, 02:51 PM
24

Re: Censoring Social Media

Good example Meg


When you think things through one can see that there is only one plausible and possible end game from a constantly advancing technology and from the constant need to keep the masses on your side and in check.

The world is simply a collection of ruling elites who represent an extremely tiny minority of the populations of the world.
But they wield all the wealth and all the power and as such have all the technology. A lot of that technology people are completely unaware of. For example did you know that they have a vehicle mounted weapon that can emit microwaves in a focussed beam over 100s of yards distance that can heat the liquids in a human face beneath the skin and effictively boil your face off? It's a form of ultra crowd control. Currently we see only water cannons, riot police and occasionally rubber bullets but they have much much more if things get out of hand.

But, I digress.

Understand that if technology keeps advancing and if keeping the masses dumb is an imperative then having control of their information sources is absolutely vital.

So one can see quite clearly that the internet in its current form is destined to disappear. We live in a remarkable point in time where the internet is still enjoyed by many but that freedom to read almost anything, to acquire detailed information on almost anything, can not continue if the ruling elite wish to rule with tighter control and wish to protect themselves from the masses as they go about removing their freedoms and privacy.

It becomes necessary for them to protect their own interests from other world rulers who might seek to encroach or take over. So one has to expect that they will become ever more paranoid about external groups influencing the populations they control.

The Orwellian Police State is utterly inevitable.

It is the logical and only possible end game to the situation where a tiny elite seek to rule and control society with impunity.

Populations are a numbers game. Is it easier to control a few people than it is to control millions and millions of people? You betcha !

Hence it doesn't take much thinking to see that the elites will (and imho are) taking measures to reduce the numbers. Waging war on health is one way, increasing levels of sterility another and steering more and more people into gay relationships yet another still.

In the end they will HAVE to shut the internet down because they can not afford for people to have such free access to information.

That process begins with censorship measures (as always founded on the back of terrorist concerns)

It proceeds with seizing control of all computer hardware and operating systems and the forcing of everyone onto one singular opertaing system platform which they control (anyone seeing this happening now???).

Control the computer architecture and O/S, control the visible internet content, and you control the people.

In simple terms imagine that they passed new broadcasting laws such that the only TV channel available in the UK was the BBC. That's all you could watch and they would control all the content on it.

A good thing? or a bad thing?


Censorship is already well underway across the globe. It's a massive concern for many people.
 
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3

Thread Tools


© Copyright 2009, Over50sForum   Contact Us | Over 50s Forum! | Archive | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Top

Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.